Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 6:11 PM David Cantrell wrote: > I personally agree that this is enough of a change to warrant > consideration for Fedora 39, but I want Fedora QA to weigh in. At this > point we have beta and final blockers and you can use this form to > propose one: > > https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug > > > Or, the most straightforward way would be to wait for 39 Beta (the freeze ends by the Beta release) , and do a normal package bump to 9.4 in the f39 branch. You wouldn't need any exception or patch cherry pick for this. -- Best regards / S pozdravem, František Zatloukal Senior Quality Engineer Red Hat ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On 8/30/23 15:45, Adam Williamson wrote: On Wed, 2023-08-30 at 12:11 -0400, David Cantrell wrote: On 8/29/23 23:13, Ian Laurie wrote: coreutils-9.3 brought changes to the behavior of the -v option which broke some of my automation scripts. Because of this I have been blocking updates to coreutils in Rawhide and Fedora 39. and I'm running coreutils-9.2-4.fc39.x86_64. This change in the -v option has been reverted in 9.4 (released 2023-08-29). From [1]: ** Changes in behavior 'cp -v' and 'mv -v' will no longer output a message for each file skipped due to -i, or -u. Instead they only output this information with --debug. I.e., 'cp -u -v' etc. will have the same verbosity as before coreutils-9.3. If it's too late to get 9.4 into 39, is it possible to locally include this specific reverting patch? [1] https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/NEWS I personally agree that this is enough of a change to warrant consideration for Fedora 39, but I want Fedora QA to weigh in. At this point we have beta and final blockers and you can use this form to propose one: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug If you want some help filing this proposal or the process, I am happy to answer questions here or in chat. I am dcantrell on IRC and in Matrix chat. well, the question is not so much how useful is *this* change, but what *other* changes does coreutils 9.4 introduce. During Beta freeze, it would be much safer to just backport this specific change. Agreed. Recent coreutils releases have done a number of changes similar to this and it is not unreasonable to assume 9.4 might have more of those as well. Just taking in this patch makes sense as it restores longstanding behavior that users were relying on. This is clearly not a Beta blocker, but you can propose it as a Beta FE... I was on the fence with this classification. My view is breaking longstanding behavior like this in very common commands in a minor version update for the software seems like it would lead to a lot of bug reports. But maybe that's just me. Whatever the appropriate classification is for this request is fine with me. -- David Cantrell Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On 8/31/23 02:11, David Cantrell wrote: I personally agree that this is enough of a change to warrant consideration for Fedora 39, but I want Fedora QA to weigh in. As per Adam's input I've created [1] and suggested to backport the specific patch as a freeze exception. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236321 -- Ian Laurie FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser TZ: Australia/Sydney ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On 8/31/23 05:45, Adam Williamson wrote: well, the question is not so much how useful is *this* change, but what *other* changes does coreutils 9.4 introduce. During Beta freeze, it would be much safer to just backport this specific change. This is clearly not a Beta blocker, but you can propose it as a Beta FE... OK I have filed a BZ [1] and a freeze exception request against it, hopefully I've done it correctly. [1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2236321 -- Ian Laurie FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser TZ: Australia/Sydney ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On Wed, 30 Aug 2023 at 20:45, Adam Williamson wrote: [..] BTW it would be good to push as many coreutils patches to upstream. Especially the selinux patch. kloczek -- Tomasz Kłoczko | LinkedIn: http://lnkd.in/FXPWxH ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On Wed, 2023-08-30 at 12:11 -0400, David Cantrell wrote: > On 8/29/23 23:13, Ian Laurie wrote: > > coreutils-9.3 brought changes to the behavior of the -v option which > > broke some of my automation scripts. > > > > Because of this I have been blocking updates to coreutils in Rawhide and > > Fedora 39. and I'm running coreutils-9.2-4.fc39.x86_64. > > > > This change in the -v option has been reverted in 9.4 (released > > 2023-08-29). From [1]: > > > > ** Changes in behavior > > > > 'cp -v' and 'mv -v' will no longer output a message for each file > > skipped > > due to -i, or -u. Instead they only output this information with > > --debug. > > I.e., 'cp -u -v' etc. will have the same verbosity as before > > coreutils-9.3. > > > > If it's too late to get 9.4 into 39, is it possible to locally include > > this specific reverting patch? > > > > [1] https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/NEWS > > I personally agree that this is enough of a change to warrant > consideration for Fedora 39, but I want Fedora QA to weigh in. At this > point we have beta and final blockers and you can use this form to > propose one: > > https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug > > If you want some help filing this proposal or the process, I am happy to > answer questions here or in chat. I am dcantrell on IRC and in Matrix chat. well, the question is not so much how useful is *this* change, but what *other* changes does coreutils 9.4 introduce. During Beta freeze, it would be much safer to just backport this specific change. This is clearly not a Beta blocker, but you can propose it as a Beta FE... -- Adam Williamson (he/him/his) Fedora QA Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org https://www.happyassassin.net ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Re: Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
On 8/29/23 23:13, Ian Laurie wrote: coreutils-9.3 brought changes to the behavior of the -v option which broke some of my automation scripts. Because of this I have been blocking updates to coreutils in Rawhide and Fedora 39. and I'm running coreutils-9.2-4.fc39.x86_64. This change in the -v option has been reverted in 9.4 (released 2023-08-29). From [1]: ** Changes in behavior 'cp -v' and 'mv -v' will no longer output a message for each file skipped due to -i, or -u. Instead they only output this information with --debug. I.e., 'cp -u -v' etc. will have the same verbosity as before coreutils-9.3. If it's too late to get 9.4 into 39, is it possible to locally include this specific reverting patch? [1] https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/NEWS I personally agree that this is enough of a change to warrant consideration for Fedora 39, but I want Fedora QA to weigh in. At this point we have beta and final blockers and you can use this form to propose one: https://qa.fedoraproject.org/blockerbugs/propose_bug If you want some help filing this proposal or the process, I am happy to answer questions here or in chat. I am dcantrell on IRC and in Matrix chat. Thanks, -- David Cantrell Red Hat, Inc. | Boston, MA | EST5EDT ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
Can we squeeze coreutils-9.4 into Fedora 39?
coreutils-9.3 brought changes to the behavior of the -v option which broke some of my automation scripts. Because of this I have been blocking updates to coreutils in Rawhide and Fedora 39. and I'm running coreutils-9.2-4.fc39.x86_64. This change in the -v option has been reverted in 9.4 (released 2023-08-29). From [1]: ** Changes in behavior 'cp -v' and 'mv -v' will no longer output a message for each file skipped due to -i, or -u. Instead they only output this information with --debug. I.e., 'cp -u -v' etc. will have the same verbosity as before coreutils-9.3. If it's too late to get 9.4 into 39, is it possible to locally include this specific reverting patch? [1] https://github.com/coreutils/coreutils/blob/master/NEWS -- Ian Laurie FAS: nixuser | IRC: nixuser TZ: Australia/Sydney ___ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
